"The Official Portrait of Miss InDiana"

Sunday, January 18, 2009

"They marched in protest. A silent procession of a people grasping for one last chance to resist. Shamefully admitting they only have themselves to blame for government policies that threaten their way of life, their security, and the future of democracy in Britain."

Recently, a friend sent me a sobering video clip http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4069761537893819675&p%20r=goog-sl.

It features Texas State Rep. Dr. Susan Gratia-Hupp testifying beforethe U.S. Senate on the Second Amendment. It was sobering because Ms.Gratia-Hupp described the fatal mistake of not carrying her handgun theday she went with her parents to a cafeteria. An insane gunman burstin, spraying gunfire and killing both her parents along with manyothers.

When something tragic like this happens, people interpret it in one of twoways. Politicians and liberals think, "Aha. An insane gunman burst intoa cafeteria and sprayed it with gunfire, killing many people. We needto ban guns. Of course, this won't keep insane gunmen from gettingguns, but that's OK." Constitutionalists and (ahem) normal peoplethink, "Aha. An insane gunman burst into a cafeteria and sprayed itwith gunfire, killing many people. We need to make it easier forlaw-abiding citizens to carry guns so this guy could have been takendown."

There is a fundamental difference between these two responses. Unfortunately,it's the former and not the latter response that gets turned into laws.This is because the latter position gives power to the people. Theformer position gives power to the government. Of course the government will choose the former. Duh.

But what riveted me about the video was not the horrible story of thegunman. It was Ms. Gratia-Hupp's final words: "I've been sitting heregetting more and more fed up with all of this talk about these piecesof machinery having no legitimate sporting purpose. No legitimatehunting purpose. People, that is NOT THE POINT of the Second Amendment.The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting … it's about our rights… to protect OURSELVES from all of YOU guys up there."In other words, gun ownership protects US from THEM.

We always forget (or are NOT TAUGHT) that the Revolutionary War was NOT awell-armed militia fighting against a FOREIGN government. They werefighting their OWN government, a government that had grown from a"dangerous servant" into a "fearful master."

Those who understand the Bill of Rights are paranoid that our guns are beingtaken away little by little. We're told we're wrong. When Obamacondescendingly assures us that it's not necessary to stock up on gunsprior to his swearing in, he is deliberately missing the point. Gunsaren't just for homeowners concerned about personal safety. Guns are toprotect US from THEM.

"Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear," Obama smoothly told us in a December statement. "I think people can take me at my word."

WRONG.

We're not taking him at his word – we're taking him at his votingrecord. Fortunately, a lot of people don't believe him, and that's whygun sales are up 50 percent by some accounts.

What Obama and his ilk don't want to admit – and by not admitting, they alsoDON'T WANT TO REMIND US – is that the original purpose of the SecondAmendment was precisely that: to protect US from THEM. The abuses ofgovernment are kept in check by the threat of an armed citizenship.Only by recognizing the potential for the citizenship to activelydefend their own GOD-GIVEN rights ("… that they are endowed by theirCREATOR with certain unalienable Rights …") will government officialsabide by their constitutionally defined limitations.

Consider the following scenario. A robber is walking along looking for a placeto rob, when the road splits. A sign pointing to the left says, "Thisway to Idiotville, a gun-free town." A sign pointing to the right says,"This way to Toughville, where every household has a gun." Which roaddo you think the robber will take?

Consider the following scenario: Politicians are walking along looking for acountry to dominate, when the road splits. A sign pointing to the leftsays, "This way to Idiot Country, a place where the citizens passivelyroll over and do what they're told." A sign pointing to the right says,"This way to Tough Country, where everyone is armed and no one willgive up their guns." Which road do you think the politicians will take?Duh.

And now we learn that Obama has appointed Eric Holder as U.S. attorneygeneral – an "anti-gun extremist who has assailed gun owners since hisdays in the Bill Clinton administration," according to the Gun Owners of America website.Oh, but let's not forget Obama telling us that "lawful gun owners havenothing to fear. … I think people can TAKE ME AT MY WORD."See? Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong.

You can't admit to being paranoid, of course. That's because paranoia is a mental condition, and Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois is pushing a firearm licensing billthat requires gun owners, among other things, to submit their mentalhealth records. Does spittin' mad count as a mental condition?

But "criminals seek out victims who are not going to fight back or offerresistance, let alone shoot them," observed Joseph Farah in a December 2008 commentary. The exact, precise sentiment can be offered with a one-word replacement: Politicians seek out victims who are not going to fight back or offer resistance, let alone shoot them.

But we're too busy gobbling up socialized medicine, food stamps, welfare,subsidized housing, and business and mortgage bailouts from thegovernment trough. The list of goodies we're offered is endless, andendlessly diverting. As long as we're getting everything free, we don'tnotice what's being taken away. Our heads are in the trough and ourrumps are in the air, waiting to be kicked.

Thomas Jefferson prophetically said it best: "A government big enough to giveyou everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."

So shout it with me: Just because you're paranoid DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE WRONG.